howtomakepaperairplanesfandomcom-20200214-history
User blog:OrigamiAirEnforcer/The Design Philosophy of OrigamiAirEnterpises
As my friend Paper Artland (TriKDang) previously shared his methods for designing his paper airplanes in a collection of videos, I have decided to explain my own approach. In the development process of my aircraft, I identify the basic design objectives desired before doing any work. Once these goals have been laid out, I look to existing designs for possible bases of improvement. Because I wish to be pragmatic in my design efforts, I will not shy away from refining and evolving older designs to meet new needs if such designs remain workable. If the older design can be improved, it likely will be (especially if conversions are possible). My acceptance and willingness to develop new versions of older designs and embrace evolution is due in part to the simple and logical nature of the process. There is no justification for exerting the effort to develop a wholly new design if you can achieve the same result with the lessened complexity and exertion of an improving an older model to fit new needs. Maintaining commonality with other designs also tends to make construction and operation easier for those making the aircraft too. When I design a paper airplane, the intended role and performance of the aircraft are the only matters which have any real bearing on the design's shape and decisions related to it. Contrasting many paper airplane designers who make their planes in large part around their looks, I do not weigh myself down with such a concern with appearances--save for the cases of my replica aircraft. My airplanes are meant to be simple and effective; beyond the aircraft which fall under the replica category, all of my designs are strictly utilitarian in nature and their appearances result from their gearing to meet their design specifications, nothing more. To improve my aircraft, some common features other designers often integrate are frequently omitted from my designs. Negative angles of incidence (where the wing reachs down to the tip of the nose from a higher point aft) and sharp noses are generally rare, as I see both these traits as tending to be harmful to the aircraft in many cases. The negative angles of incidence can often expose drag inducing pockets to direct air flow, slowing the aircraft and reducing performance. In addition, this angling can result in the nose slamming down upon landing, resulting in damage. Sharp noses tend to be weak and prone to damage, or alternatively, potentially harmful to people or property. Because of my interest in the airframe's performance and little else, most of my aircraft feature blunt noses with wings with angles of incidence of 0 degrees. This keeps the bottom of the fuselage and the wings' angle of incidence parallel parallel. The blunt nose design tends to allow the airframe to last longer and perform better than designers with sharper noses; and flat angle of incidence also tends to make the aircraft last longer, handle better and be constructed more easily. Used in conjunction with this wing design often times is the placement of ventral winglets, which may double as outriggers to aid inflight stability and make ground handling easier. On rarer occasions I integrate specifically tailored landing skids and gear into my designs. The other design consideration I take into account often times is complexity. Fortunately, performance and complexity are not usually mutually exclusive and so I do not have to choose one over the other. When I must I do attempt to keep a reasonable balance. I do strive to keep complexity as limited as possible, due to my own personal belief that "simpler is better" and the wishes of viewers who have expressed similar sentiments. Other origami aviators are free to talk about their ideas and methods in the comments here and their own blog posts here on the Paper Airplane Wiki. Category:Blog posts Category:OrigamiAirEnterprises